Just one year ago Matrox introduced their Marvel G200, a true all-in-one card that gave new meaning to the term "home video editing." The success of the Marvel G200 on the international market was pretty good, with an extremely strong following in Europe and a somewhat weaker sales report in the US. Overall, Matrox was pleased with the way things went with the product and it would make perfect sense for them to improve on it. Rather than releasing generation after generation of the same Marvel G200 product, Matrox sat quietly away in their Canadian based offices and worked towards designing an even better solution (since the Marvel G200 did have its flaws) in order to live up to the success of the original Marvel.

The May 20^th release of the successor to the G200, the G400, made quite a few gamers smile but very little attention was paid to the potential this single chip provided for an upcoming Marvel product. In short, what would you get if you coupled the strengths of the original Marvel G200 with the functionality and performance of the semi-newly released G400 graphics chip? The Marvel G400. As we predicted back in May, Matrox will be making the release of such a product towards the end of the year and , as we all know, the holiday season is almost upon us and there will be quite a few users out there with around $300 to kill on something. Should it be the Marvel G400?

When we first looked at the Marvel G400 on paper it seemed like there was very little you could do to make the Marvel G400 any different from the original Marvel. Adding the G400 to it just seemed like an attempt to improve the gaming performance of the card. A glaring oversight made in that assumption is the fact that in addition to improved gaming performance, the G400 offers support for the DualHead technology where a single graphics card can drive two separate video output devices. Still confused about how this helps the Marvel design? Imagine being able to preview one video source in a window on your monitor, while previewing another video source on your TV. Or imagine how helpful it would be to have your audio editing applications open in one monitor and have your video editing tools open on your TV at the same time. And if you're not spending all of your time editing home videos, how about the ability to work on a document, surf the web, or write emails while the rest of your family watches a DVD run off of your computer on the nearby TV without obstructing the windows on your monitor screen. These are three of the possibilities that the G400's DualHead feature brought to the new Marvel G400, but what else makes the Marvel G400 any different from the original release back in 1998?

For those of you that aren't familiar with the original Marvel, it was considered to be the "Swiss Army Knife" of video cards because it was one of the more versatile all-in-one solutions available on the market at the time. The Marvel series offers your basic set of S-Video Input/Output, Composite (RCA) Input/Output, and Coaxial input for TV/Cable input.

The Marvel G400 comes with the same cable and instructional bundle that blessed the original Marvel, which includes the two 6' RCA cables, and a quick installation poster that helps the installation process considerably. The idea behind the Matrox G400 is still to bring video editing to the home PC user or the video enthusiast at a reasonable cost without compromising features. Does it accomplish that? Let's have a look at the physical card first.

Click to Enlarge

The Marvel G400 is noticeably smaller than the old Marvel G200 simply because of the move towards higher density memory chips and the lack of a memory expansion connector on the card itself. The Marvel G400 is actually quite reminiscent of the Millennium G400 with a few minor differences.

The card features a standard 16MB of SGRAM that is non-upgradeable. According to Matrox the decision to include only 16MB of SGRAM was made because of a lack of space on the Marvel's PCB, but as we've seen with other video card manufacturers, placing memory chips on the back of the PCB isn't a forbidden fruit and it can be done. Most likely, due to cost concerns, the Marvel G400 will only ship as a 16MB SGRAM card.

The memory present on our evaluation board was 6ns Samsung SGRAM which is mathematically rated to support clock speeds of up to 166MHz, indicative that the Marvel G400 is based on the regular G400's design and not that of the G400MAX (the Marvel G400 also features the 300MHz RAMDAC versus the 360MHz RAMDAC of the G400MAX). Once again, a decision probably made as a direct result of cost considerations.

Like the G400 boards, the Marvel G400 will only be available in an AGP interface with no planned support for the PCI bus. Since the G400 chip itself boasts AGP 2X and 4X compliance, the Marvel G400 does the same.

The chip itself is covered by a fairly large heatsink but don't let that deceive you as it generates considerably less heat than the most recently released product of this kind, the 3dfx Voodoo3 3500TV. The Marvel G400 still adds a good amount of heat to your system but after hours of continuous usage it wasn't nearly as hot as the 3500TV.

The Matrox TVO controller on-board the Marvel G400 is the same chip used on the Millennium G400 boards and provides for the DualHead functionality of the card. For those of you unfamiliar with DualHead, it is the ability to use the single G400 graphics chip to output to two separate output devices as if it were two separate graphics cards. Absent from the Marvel G400 is the second VGA output connector like that found on the other two G400 boards. Instead it has been replaced by the 26-pin proprietary connector that is used to interface with the Marvel's breakout box.

This effectively cripples the DualHead functionality as we've come to know it on the Marvel G400. However, with the use of a soon to be available daughter card, the second interface provided for by the DualHead will offer the option of being a Digital Flat Panel (DVI) connector.

So, although the Marvel G400 makes use of the DualHead feature, the secondary output can go to either a TV screen using the Marvel's breakout box or a Digital Flat Panel monitor with the optional daughter card. Keep in mind that this additional daughter card occupies a slot cutout to the right of the Marvel G400 and thus removes a single PCI slot from being available in your system.

The breakout box is virtually identical to the old Marvel G200's breakout box. The same no-slip-grip feet on the bottom of the box make setting it on the floor or on your desk a simple task and you don't have to worry about it sliding around too much. One complaint about the design is that it is still the bulkiest in comparison to the boxes of its two biggest competitors (AIW128 & 3500TV). The breakout box still features the three composite inputs and outputs, as well as the S-Video inputs and outputs and the Coaxial Cable/Antennae input.

The only new addition to the Marvel G400's breakout box is the SPDIF output connector for digital sound output. While this is a unique addition to the Marvel G400, we didn't see any real purpose other than for outputting digital sound for DVD playback.

Hardware MJPEG: Pros and Cons

The major selling point for the Marvel G200 was the fact that it didn’t simply include a software MPEG2 encoder for video. Instead it used a hardware MJPEG encoder for true to source video capture. This Hardware MJPEG support is once again provided for on the Marvel G400 courtesy of the on-board Zoran ZR36060PQC.

For a card retailing at $300 there is no way to provide support for hardware MPEG2 video capture and editing with the current technology. Instead of offering a software MPEG2 video capture/editing solution Matrox decided to stick to their guns and continue, in their opinion to use the next best thing, hardware MJPEG. Hardware MJPEG is not as efficient as MPEG2 compression but a hardware MPEG2 codec on a sub $300 enthusiast's card is not a reality we can enjoy.

In terms of efficiency, MJPEG loses out in the amount of disk space needed to hold a single second of video at NTSC or PAL resolutions at 30 fps with no visible loss in quality or drop in frames. At 704 x 480 (NTSC) at ~30 fps (29.9 fps) -- otherwise known as D1 resolution (full NTSC or full PAL resolution) -- the data rate required by the MJPEG codec as approximately 3MB per second. To capture a 30 second commercial would require 90MB of disk space, and a 30 minute TV program would require a hefty 5.4GB of space. For a product directed at home users, there are some steep storage requirements to get the quality Matrox is boasting for the Marvel G400. Of course you don't have to opt for the highest image quality (which you probably won’t considering that 50GB hard drives aren't common place just yet) in which case the MJPEG codec isn't too bad but it is still quite a disk space hog.

The advantage of the hardware MJPEG codec on the Marvel G400 is that capturing at full D1 resolution can be done without dropping any frames due to the inability of your CPU to keep up with the capture. This is in contrast to the methodologies used by the CPU dependent ATI All-in-Wonder 128 and the 3dfx Voodoo3 3500TV, which perform solely software MPEG2 video captures. Using a software MPEG2 codec to capture video causes the entire workload to be placed onto your CPU and any processes running in the background while this capture is taking place will contribute to dropped frames.

If you look at ATI's All-in-Wonder 128, which only does MPEG2 video capture in software, one of the requirements for capturing MPEG2 at 640 x 480 at 30fps with IBP frames compression (A good technical explanation of this and other MPEG issues is available here) is that you must have a Pentium III processor. The Marvel G400, with its hardware MJPEG, describes the minimum system requirements as a 233MHz AGP enabled system (most likely referring to a Pentium II 233 rather than a Pentium MMX 233).

Click to Enlarge

The argument can be made that MJPEG is not a widely accepted standard and thus being able to capture using hardware MJPEG is not an advantage over software MPEG2, but for this very purpose Matrox included a MPEG2 Transcoder to convert MJPEG into MPEG1 or MPEG2 files after being captured using the hardware MJPEG codec. This still means that you have to perform the initial capture to disk using MJPEG which, as mentioned before, isn't the most storage efficient, before using the transcoder to convert it to MPEG2.

 

The bundled transcoder is the Ligos MPEG2 Transcoder, which supports both SSE and 3DNow! instruction sets. The basic interface for the transcoder is simple: you select your input file and you select your output type (MPEG1 or MPEG2 @ whatever resolution you specify) and click the little green button to proceed with the conversion. Our 93MB MJPEG capture (33 seconds of video at D1 resolution - 704 x 480) came out as an 18MB MPEG2 using the transcoder and a 58:1 compression ratio. In terms of image quality the MPEG2 output file was of somewhat lesser quality with a definite loss of detail but the overall image quality was a very good reproduction of the original 93MB MJPEG capture.

One major gripe we had with the bundled transcoder is the limited functionality of the software because it basically converts and that's it. Clicking on the advanced options button resulted in nothing more than a "here's what you get when you order the full version" window, so if you want a bit more functionality out of your transcoder you're probably going to have to shell out an additional $199 for the full version. The full version adds single pass variable bit-rate control (an important feature for adjusting quality which isn't provided for with the version bundled with the Marvel) and multiprocessor support under Windows NT in addition to a number of other features listed here on their special upgrade page for Matrox users.

In essence, MJPEG is unique to this market, supported only by Matrox and it places emphasis on image quality versus compression efficiency. The benefits of MJPEG are two fold: on one hand you get the high quality video capture you want and, on the other, you can convert it to MPEG1/2 at a later time. The only requirements for the Marvel G400 in this sense are a great deal of temporary disk space (to store the MJPEG files as the codec captures in hardware and writes directly to disk first) and not a fast CPU. The beauty of the Marvel G400 as a affordable solution is that disk space is much cheaper than CPU power and it is much easier to go out and pick up another 10GB drive than toss away your Pentium II and pick up a new Pentium III 500.

Cons for MJPEG are also present, the most prominent of them being the disk usage which should be a key consideration of yours if you are thinking of purchasing it.

TV Tuning & Output

The Marvel's breakout box contains a built in TV-tuner that allows for a coaxial input in order to allow you to watch TV on your PC. This is almost a prerequisite for any all-in-one card, the basic functionality of a TV tuner. Of course, just like ATI's solution, the Marvel G400 does ship with the ability to enable/disable closed captioning, as well as save the closed caption text to a file for later viewing or editing.

For students away at college, this makes for a perfect way to fit both a TV and a PC in a room at once by using your PC as both a computer and a TV. Watching TV in a tiny window in the corner of your screen while your work may be a bit distracting but it is much better than having to turn around to glance at another space consuming screen.

The TV Output on the Marvel G400 is obviously top notch and is equivalent to that of the two previous G400 based cards, but it is limited by a maximum resolution of 1024 x 768. The driving force behind the TV output is the DualHead technology that was a step in a new direction for the company.

DualHead in Depth

What's so unique about the hardware MJPEG video capture on the Marvel G400? Nothing really since it remains unchanged from the original Marvel G200. So what does the Marvel G400 offer that the G200 didn't? DualHead.

Click to Enlarge

As we briefly alluded to at the start of this review, the potential for DualHead wasn't truly realized until the technology was put into the hands of those that could truly use it. Among the feedback Matrox got from professionals using the DualHead on their G400 cards, the interest in seeing the features of DualHead brought over to the video editing scene increased tremendously.

Just like with the standard G400, the DualHead on the Marvel G400 provides the ability to output a DVD movie signal to your second display without even having to output it to a window on the primary display. Translation? You can be playing back a DVD movie on your computer, have the window minimized and still have it play back in full screen on your TV using the DVDMax functionality of the DualHead on the Marvel. Remember that the DVD playback is still software accelerated with the Marvel G400 so you can't pop open a game of Quake 3 or Unreal Tournament while your family watches a DVD movie, but you can surf the web or check your email provided that you have a fast enough processor.

The ability to clone your desktop onto the second display is also present with the Marvel G400 but keep in mind that unlike the standard G400 based cards, the Marvel cannot output to an analog monitor, so the usefulness of outputting a part of your desktop to your TV depends on your particular application for the technology. From the perspective of a user editing home movies, you can use your TV as a production preview monitor to preview the edits you are working on or to view a second video source as you are viewing the first on your primary display.

Another feature worth mentioning that is also a part of the DualHead function is the ability to use your secondary display as a zoom window. For example, your TV can function as a zoom window for a picture you are editing on your primary display's desktop so instead of having to zoom in using your image editing application you can set a hot key combination to zoom in on any particular area of your screen and place that image on your TV (secondary display). This tool is extremely useful for those that spend their time in Photoshop editing one or two pixels at a time, which is very tedious to do even at the highest of resolutions.

Another potential use of DualHead not really explored at the time of its introduction was its usefulness in games. Although it will be some time before we see truly enjoyable games (if we ever do at all) that support DualHead, there is production being made on such efforts. The two most unique possibilities that were brought to our attention was the use of the second monitor as a "rocket cam" that would follow the path of a player's rocket as it traversed the game arena or the use of the secondary display as a cinematic sequence of the action taking place in a real time strategy game generated in real time (a third person flyby of the action taking place in a Command & Conquer type of game while you are controlling your troops on your primary display with a top-down view).

While both of those possibilities sound interesting, it is doubtful that they will convince a hard core gamer to purchase a G400 over something with obviously superior gaming performance.

Environment Mapped Bump Mapping

What is Environment Mapped Bump Mapping (EMBM)? As taken from our G400 Review:

Instead of manipulating a standalone texture map to make it "look" like it has bumps on it, Environment-Mapped Bump Mapping adds a third texture to the rendering sequence (in cases where both an Environment Map and a Texture Map are present). The third texture, or the bump-map, is nothing more than the basic environment map with bumps and grooves. Since the G400 is capable of single pass multi-texturing (as well as 2 pixels per clock in the event that only a single texture is being processed), the Environment Map and Texture Map are processed first in 1 clock cycle, then the Bump-Map is added on top of them in 1/2 a clock cycle. It's simple addition of textures, unfortunately the added 1/2 clock cycle required by the Bump-Map does tend to slow things down a little.

No EMBM

EMBM

Using Rage Software's Expendable, an incredible looking game, there was a noticeable drop in frame rate when Bump Mapping was enabled near points of extensive use of Environment-Mapped Bump Mapping. At 1024 x 768 x 32-bit color & 32-bit Z-buffer on a normal Pentium II 400, the frame rate dropped from extremely fluid to a point where the game was a little choppy. The game was still playable, although be warned that there is a drop in performance. If you look at it from the point of view of the G400 chip itself, it makes sense that there would be a drop in performance as you're making the processor calculate information for another 1/2 clock cycle just so you can look at pretty water - the things we make our computers do ;)

Will Bump Mapping catch on? Considering that the only requirement for a game to support Environment Mapped Bump Mapping is that the developer makes use of DirectX 6 or greater and includes specific support for it (not too complex), don't be too surprised if the market leaves some doors open for G400 users. Hopefully other manufacturers will catch on and we'll see Environment Mapped Bump Mapping catch on big time, it would be sad to lose this kind of quality because of poor market support.

Unfortunately this isn't the case, that one Expendable screen shot caught our attention but since then, there has yet to be a comparable example in the gaming industry. The games that have implemented EMBM haven't done so nearly as well as Rage did with Expendable, so look around at other implementations of EMBM before you make any decisions here.  Dungeon Keeper 2 supports EMBM, and the implementation is very well done, but there are some cases when EMBM is just not that great of an option to have turned on.

Let's hope for Matrox’s sake that things do change, but very few users will be going out and buying G400's simply because Expendable's water has cool looking bumps on it unless more gaming manufacturers start boasting more support for the technology. 

Gaming Performance

The most obvious difference between the Marvel G200 and the new Marvel G400 is, of course, the difference in gaming performance. Honestly, the G200 was not an excellent gamer's chip, but it had the potential to be. However after being plagued by poor driver releases and the resulting poor gaming performance, it didn't end up with very positive performance figures in comparison to the TNTs and the Voodoo2s out there at the time. The Marvel G200 was never intended to be a gamer's solution but the G200 part of that equation kept a few possible users from pursuing what would otherwise be a very interesting card to use in their systems.

This is one of the areas in which the Marvel G400 improves on. The G400 is a much more competitive gaming solution than the G200 was upon its release. While driver issues are still present with the G400, at least the performance of the chipset (especially considering the upcoming release of the G400 TurboGL drivers) is up to par with the competition in contrast to the G200 where the performance wasn’t up to par with the competition. Keep in mind that Matrox's target market with this product still isn't the hardcore gaming market, because honestly, they cannot succeed there with this chip, but they are at least better equipped with the G400 as the heart and soul of the Marvel than they were with the G200.

But how does this performance compare to competing products? Considering that the only competing products are the ATI All-in-Wonder 128 and the 3dfx Voodoo3 3500TV there isn't that big of a comparison that needs to be made. Compared to the All-in-Wonder 128, the performance of the G400 versus the Rage 128 (the core of the AIW128) is obviously superior. The Rage 128, if you recall, was a creation from the generation just prior to that of the V3/TNT2/G400 family of 3D graphics chips, so it isn't a surprise that in terms of gaming performance the Marvel G400 holds the advantage over the AIW128.

The 3dfx Voodoo3 3500TV is another story. While ATI married a decent video editing platform with a weak performing graphics chipset 3dfx linked a strong performance oriented graphics chipset with a weak video editing platform. The result? A really fast gaming card with TV input and output. Notice the emphasis on the gaming part rather than the TV input/output, because the 3500TV is mainly a gamer's card with a few extra features. In terms of gaming performance, the Marvel G400 does offer 32-bit rendering but in terms of raw gaming performance the 3500TV holds the advantage.

On the performance ladder, the Marvel G400 falls in-between the AIW128 and the Voodoo3 3500TV which is a much better ranking than the year old Marvel G200 can boast.

For updated performance scores of the G400 visit our Matrox G400 Revisited Article

Software Bundle

With a product like the Marvel G400, Matrox had to be very careful in the selection of their software bundle to make sure that they weren't scaring off users with complex video editing software and at the same time they had to make sure that they weren't limiting productivity with their software selection.

Click to Enlarge

Unfortunately, a sacrifice was made in order to keep the Marvel G400 easy to use for the first time video editors, which explains the inclusion of Avid Cinema, an extremely easy to use video editing package that is way too oversimplified for users once they get beyond a certain level of experience with video editing. It would be asking too much from Matrox to see a copy of Adobe Premier included with the Marvel G400, but something a bit more challenging than Avid Cinema would be a very welcome desire, even if provided only as an option to those that requested it.

Avid Cinema does make adding basic effects and creating small home videos a very simple task but there is only so much you can do with such a simple program. It isn't nearly as difficult to use as some of the more powerful packages out there, but then again, once you learn how to use those powerful programs, Avid Cinema seems like a big joke.

 

Click to Enlarge

Once again, Matrox's PC-VCR Remote is back and it and remains unchanged from the original Marvel's bundle. The PC-VCR remote is a window resembling a remote that can control your TV Tuner, Line-In Feed, as well as process on-the-fly recordings for those moments you just can't live without watching a second time. The application itself is quite bulky, and even on a large desktop, it occupies a considerable amount of valuable real estate.

Luckily you have the option of hiding the remote or even using a smaller version of it which allows you the basic functions necessary for the TV-Tuner. As simplistic as the PC-VCR remote may seem, it provides you with most of the controls, both at beginner and advanced levels, that you'll need to get the full benefit of the card.

Click to Enlarge

Matrox also bundled a Software DVD player, the Ligos MPEG Transcoder discussed earlier in the article, and a copy of Ulead Photo Express for static (2D) image editing. In terms of games, the OEM version of Ubi Soft's Tonic Trouble (included with the first Marvel G200 as well) and the full version of Wild Metal Country (a DualHead/EMBM game) are also bundled with the Marvel.

Conclusion

If you aren't a huge gamer and simply want the hardware MJPEG video capture features of the Marvel then you may want to look around for the older Marvel G200 as long as you're willing to give up the DualHead features. With the release of the Marvel G400 at $299, it would make sense for the price of the Marvel G200 to drop, and if all you're looking for is a cheap introduction into video editing without worrying about having too fast of a system then the original Marvel G200 should be able to cut it.

If you're a huge DVD fan and want basic video capture support then you may want to take a look at ATI's older All-in-Wonder 128 since it does boast hardware DVD support. The hardware DVD of the AIW128 does look considerably superior to that of the software DVD output and provided that you aren't really looking for a video editing system for your PC, the AIW128 should be sufficient for DVD buffs looking to use their PC for little more than surfing the net.

For the hard core gamer interested in good TV output, your standard TNT2 with TV-output should do just fine, but if you are also interested in video capture support explore the possibilities of either the ASUS V3800 Deluxe or the Voodoo3 3500TV but be warned, both of those cards will set you back above $200.

So when should you buy the Marvel G400? If you aren't low on disk space (or are willing to go out and buy another hard drive for your videos) and want to produce high quality home videos and, at the same time, you want to use that system for gaming and can find a use or two for the DualHead feature then the Marvel G400 starts to make sense.

It is a difficult sell at $299, since the software bundle could be strengthened considerably and the video editing capabilities are relatively unchanged since the Marvel G200 but that still doesn't keep the Marvel G400 from being the best overall solution of its kind, at least until some competition pops up.

As a cost effective solution that brings desktop video editing to you in an easy to use package, Matrox succeeds where the rest have failed. The $300 pricetag still brings you, as a home PC user or a video enthusiast, video editing at a reasonable price without compromising features. The support for hardware MJPEG just makes the Marvel G400 a little more unique than the competition, in a very good way.